🔗 Share this article

Welcome back. Prior to the holidays, the Labour leader had intended to use the initial days back after the parliamentary break to highlight government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He set out this argument yesterday in an article where he cited steps including plans to reduce utility costs. However, Starmer’s cost of living media push has been blown out of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct strategy to guaranteeing supporters receive affordable power.

No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on adopting the American method – which is likely good news for other nations.

But there is a heated discussion ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to abduct the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with American interests, particularly in regarding the country’s oil industry.

The Prime Minister has declined to censure the American intervention, and the government has dodged questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a joint statement which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:

The European Union urge calm and caution by all parties, to avoid escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the situation.

The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the principles of international law and the United Nations charter must be upheld. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to defend those standards, as a pillar of the global security framework.

Mike Tapp, was doing an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal broke global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:

Absolutely not. The British government are and will remain in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the legal basis for the action that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.

But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.

Asked about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:

Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.

The Prime Minister may well want to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I cannot think of anything that could be a valid excuse.

Here is the agenda for the day.

10am: John Swinney, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.

Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a press briefing.

2.30pm: The home secretary, takes queries in the Commons.

After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.